In today’s globally connected economy, consumers are faced with the fact that at some point in the production of the goods they buy, injustices may have occurred. For example, workers in developing countries may have been exploited. My paper discusses the following question: Are consumers responsible for unjust conditions of production, and if yes, what makes this the case? The fact that consumers are causally connected to injustices in production is not sufficient to establish any responsibility on their part, since the responsibility for these injustices lies primarily with the agents who directly perpetrate them. Are consumers under a duty to inform themselves about the conditions of production and adapt their consumption choices accordingly, or can they claim that their sphere of responsibility does not extend that far? The case for consumer responsibility is stronger when consumers are not only said to be connected to unjust conditions of production, but are claimed to contribute to or benefit from them. However, their contribution is indirect and usually unintentional, and it is controversial whether benefiting from an injustice is wrong per se. I suggest two alternative arguments that may better explain the claim that consumers share in responsibility for injustices that occur in production. First, buying a good that was unjustly produced can be seen as an implicit endorsement of unjust practices. Second, buying a good that was produced unjustly will often benefit the perpetrator of the injustice, and benefiting wrongdoers is something we should refrain from.
